The Delhi ITAT held that institutions engaged in preservation of environment fall under a specific charitable limb under Section 2(15). Registration under Section 12A cannot be denied merely because fee-based receipts were earned.
The Delhi ITAT held that informal WhatsApp conversations without corroborative evidence cannot establish unexplained investment under Section 69A. Since no excess jewellery, invoices, or payment proof were found, the addition was deleted.
The Gujarat AAR refused to answer questions regarding documentary proof and invoice endorsement for SEZ zero-rated supplies. The Authority held that such issues do not fall within the categories permitted under Section 97 of the CGST Act.
The Gujarat AAR held that AAC bricks cannot be classified under Chapter 69 as ceramic products because the autoclaving process does not satisfy the firing requirement prescribed for ceramic goods. The ruling classified AAC bricks under Heading 6810 as articles of cement or concrete.
Gujarat AAR held that ITC on construction of a concrete VCV tower used for EHV cable manufacturing is admissible because the structure functions as foundational and structural support for plant and machinery under Section 17 of the CGST Act.
The Gujarat AAR held that black mineral water containing added minerals but no sugar, sweeteners, or flavouring is classifiable under HSN 22011010. The ruling confirms applicability of 5% GST under Entry 146 of Notification No. 09/2025.
Gujarat AAR held that input tax credit on goods and services used for constructing a CCV Tower was admissible as the structure formed an essential structural support for manufacturing machinery. The ruling clarified that such support systems are covered within “plant and machinery” under Section 17(5) of the CGST Act.
The article argues that refunds arising from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mohit Minerals fall squarely within the proviso to Section 56 of the CGST Act. It contends that the statutory framework mandates 9% interest for court-ordered refunds that have attained finality, not the 6% awarded by the High Court.
SEBI’s consultation paper proposes mandatory disclosures for refinancing of municipal debt, including lender details, repayment schedules and past restructuring history to improve investor transparency.
SEBI’s consultation paper proposes allowing mutual funds to use intraday borrowings for broader liquidity and cash flow management purposes beyond redemption payouts.
